The Visions of Mrs. E.G. White

OBJECTION 38. — THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST

She saw in 1847, says the objector, that the number 666 of the image beast was made up. This is based on language found in Word to the Little Flock, p. 19, as follows: “I saw all that ‘would not receive the mark of the Beast, and of his image, in their foreheads or in their hands,’ could not buy or sell. (o) I saw that the number (666) of the Image Beast was made up; (p) and that it was the Beast that changed the Sabbath,” etc. Now says the objector from the West, she here teaches that the number of the image beast, but the Review now teaches that the number belongs to the “first” or papal beast; and besides, the image beast has no number; and therefore the vision is notoriously false and out of joint. And hereupon a little “Voice” pipes up in the East to re-echo the sentiment, as it thinks such facts, “though painful [?] to learn,” “should be more generally known;” and lo, like their prototypes of old, they make merry and send gifts one to another. Revelation 11:10. It is perhaps, almost to bad to upset this little cup of froth over which they gloat with such apparent delight; but facts will most effectually do it. Those who have the Word to the Little Flock, and can read it for themselves, will notice, from what is stated on p. 21, that this vision was not published by sister White, nor by Bro. White, but by still another person. They will notice also that all through the vision, letters are inserted inclosed in parentheses, like the letters “(o)” and “(p)” in the extract above given. These refer to scriptures placed at the bottom of the page, and were the work of the publisher, not of sister W. They will then notice that the figures 666, in the sentence, “I saw that the number (666) of the Image Beast was made up,” are likewise inclosed in marks of parenthesis, showing that their insertion is also the work of the publisher, and no part of the vision itself. Then we have, as the testimony of the vision, simply this: “I saw that the number of the Image Beast was made up.” We now inquire what is meant by the “Image Beast?” We do not think it can refer to the two-horned beast, as there would seem to be no propriety in calling a beast an image beast, because it makes an image to another beast, any more than there would be in calling that the image beast, to which the image is made. We therefore incline to the view that by the expression “Image Beast,” is meant the image which the two-horned beast makes to the first beast, and which he endows with life, causing it to speak, and attempt various other acts. Assuming that the image is what is referred to, though we assert nothing on the point either way, then it follows from the vision that this image has a number. It is certain that the first, or papal, beast, has a number, and his number is 666, as Revelation 13:18, plainly informs us; and it would not damage the likeness in any respect for the image of that beast to have a number also; whether the same or another would not matter. Doubtless more light will be given on this point as we approach the time of its fulfillment. VEGW 100.1

But it may be said, The vision asserts that the number was already made up in 1847. Nothing of the kind; for we are expressly carried forward to the time when we can neither buy nor sell without the mark of the beast, a period yet future, for the time when the number would be made up; and as just remarked, as we approach that time, doubtless the developments of the prophecy will afford us a better understanding of this point. All we care to show here, is what we have shown, namely,that the number 666 which belongs to the first beast, is not the number that the vision here speaks of, though the one who published the vision, no doubt at the time sincerely supposed it was, and hence inserted the figures. And it does not matter that this vision, with the notes and explanations of the publisher above referred to, was incorporated by Bro. White into the “Word for the Little Flock,” as the best interpretation they could then give to the points in question. It still remains a fact that the insertion of the figures was not a part of the vision itself. And the mistakes of an interpreter upon a point not definitely explained, must not be set down as a fault of the vision. The vision speaks of the number of the Image Beast, but does not tell us what that number is. It says nothing about the number 666, and hence does not apply it to any other beast but the papal beast, where the Scriptures place it. The objector has here suffered himself to be misled. Placed by the side of the facts, his objection disappears; and no discrepancy is found to exist between what this vision contains and what the Review now teaches, or has taught. VEGW 101.1